Updated guideline for closure of abdominal wall incisions from the European and American Hernia Societies.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia is a frequent complication of abdominal wall incision. Surgical technique is an important risk factor for the development of incisional hernia. The aim of these updated guidelines was to provide recommendations to decrease the incidence of incisional hernia. METHODS: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL was performed on 22 January 2022. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network instrument was used to evaluate systematic reviews and meta-analyses, RCTs, and cohort studies. The GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to appraise the certainty of the evidence. The guidelines group consisted of surgical specialists, a biomedical information specialist, certified guideline methodologist, and patient representative. RESULTS: Thirty-nine papers were included covering seven key questions, and weak recommendations were made for all of these. Laparoscopic surgery and non-midline incisions are suggested to be preferred when safe and feasible. In laparoscopic surgery, suturing the fascial defect of trocar sites of 10 mm and larger is advised, especially after single-incision laparoscopic surgery and at the umbilicus. For closure of an elective midline laparotomy, a continuous small-bites suturing technique with a slowly absorbable suture is suggested. Prophylactic mesh augmentation after elective midline laparotomy can be considered to reduce the risk of incisional hernia; a permanent synthetic mesh in either the onlay or retromuscular position is advised. CONCLUSION: These updated guidelines may help surgeons in selecting the optimal approach and location of abdominal wall incisions.

An incisional hernia results from a weakness of the abdominal wall muscles that allows fat from the inside or organs to bulge out. These hernias are quite common after abdominal surgery at the site of a previous incision. There is research that discusses different ways to close an incision and this may relate to the chance of hernia formation. The aim of this study was to review the latest research and to provide a guide for surgeons on how best to close incisions to decrease hernia rates. When possible, surgery through small incisions may decrease the risk of hernia formation. If small incisions are used, it may be better if they are placed away from areas that are already weak (such as the belly button). If the incision is larger than 1 cm, it should be closed with a deep muscle-fascia suture in addition to skin sutures. If there is a large incision in the middle of the abdomen, the muscle should be sutured using small stitches that are close together and a slowly absorbable suture should be used. For patients who are at higher risk of developing hernias, when closing the incision, the muscle layer can be strengthened by using a piece of (synthetic) mesh. There is no good research available on recovery after surgery and no clear guides on activity level or whether a binder will help prevent hernia formation.

Standardized Surgical Primary Repair for Burst Abdomen Reduces the Risk of Fascial Redehiscence.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a standardized surgical primary repair for burst abdomen could lower the rate of fascial redehiscence. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Burst abdomen after midline laparotomy is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The surgical treatment is poorly investigated but known for a poor outcome with high rates of re-evisceration (redehiscence). METHODS: This study was a single-center, interventional study comparing rates of fascial redehiscence after surgery for burst abdomen in a study cohort (July 2014-April 2019) to a historical cohort (January 2009-December 2013). A standardized surgical strategy was introduced for burst abdomen: The abdominal wall was closed using a slowly absorbable running suture in a mass closure technique with "large bites" of 3 cm in "small steps" of 5 mm, in an approximate wound-suture ratio of 1:10. Demographics, comorbidities, preceding type of surgery, and surgical technique were registered. The primary outcome was fascial redehiscence. The secondary outcome was 30- and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: The study included 186 patients with burst abdomen (92 patients in the historical cohort vs 94 patients in the study cohort). No difference in sex, performance status, comorbidity, or body mass index was found. In 77% of the historical cohort and 80% of the study cohort, burst abdomen occurred after emergency laparotomy (P = 0.664). The rate of redehiscence was reduced from 13% (12/92 patients) in the historical cohort to 4% (4/94 patients) in the study cohort (P = 0.033). There was no difference in 30- or 90-day mortality. CONCLUSION: Standardized surgical primary repair for burst abdomen reduced the rate of fascial redehiscence.